The use of the word “engineer” to describe anyone even vaguely technical rankles, but an assumption that engineers can make or fix anything is equally irritating writes the Secret Engineer.
One of the accusations that generally gets flung about round here is that the term “engineer” is used far too freely. The perceived degradation that comes with its use for technicians and mechanics seems to invariably cause ire and to raise hackles.
However I would suggest that the lack of understanding by all and sundry regarding what engineers are, and engineering is, has another undesirable side effect.
Thus it is not only a problem that those who are not qualified to be called so are considered engineers, there is also the fact that if you are an engineer then you are personally expected to have a breadth of knowledge and skills that range all the way from designing a nuclear reactor to whittling a nut and bolt out of a couple of lumps of steel using nothing more than a blunt penknife. There are people I know who could do either, and possibly one or two who could do both, but these particular individuals fall into the “genius” or possibly even “savant” categories.
If you let slip you are an engineer then you open the flood gates to “Could you just fix this doo-hickey, the spring’s missing but I’m sure it will be easy for you” – after all you’re an engineer.
Speaking for myself, I fully admit that I’m not great at the “practical” stuff. I know that there are some who will reel in horror at such a revelation, wondering how you can pursue a successful career in engineering when you find it difficult to even cut a piece of bar straight. I can tell you that so long as you’ve had a go at this sort of stuff you can develop a feel for it, even if that feel cannot be translated into worthwhile application.
I can also tell you that it is a frequent source of frustration, thinking “if I can just quickly hack this widget out I can prove the principle I am trying to introduce” – and then having to wait until someone else can do it for you. I am actually a lot better than I used to be but a natural lack of dexterity coupled to occasional problems with fine movement of the digits ensures I will never be a craftsman in this sense.
Unfortunately though, if you let slip you are an engineer then you open the flood gates to “Could you just fix this doo-hickey, the spring’s missing but I’m sure it will be easy for you – after all you’re an engineer.” No matter the protestations, much like a doctor at a dinner party is expected to successfully diagnose a problem from the vaguest of symptoms, you are seen as this mystical being. This blasé view of professional capability tends to manifest itself in a different way at work, or at least such are my experiences at the moment.
I know that when I talk of engineering, you and I realise that this covers a multitude of specialist areas. The knowledge required to carry out a particular role tends to overlap with others but that does not make you an expert in someone else’s field.
As a Senior Design Engineer, I am aware of production techniques and theories – such that I can design sympathetically for ease of manufacture – but you wouldn’t expect me to design a set of mould tools or set up a complex production line with timed routings. Unfortunately though some think that an engineer, is an engineer, is an engineer. Thus I have recently been asked, without any guidance or experience, to produce a set of assembly build instructions for an existing product that I have had no involvement with.
Of course I could do it given the time and access to relevant information but, as I rather firmly pointed out, it would be much better for the Production Engineer to actually do it. As it happens it was passed on to the Electronics Engineer. After all he’s an engineer so he can do anything – can’t he?
I couldn’t agree with you more!
Well, there is always retirement if you have lost the joy of engineering. When did you quit doing the job for the sheer enjoyment derived from the profession? And don’t hand me the serious line of pure bull shine that says you are doing if for other reasons, because it surely can’t be the pay check.
I can sympathise with the author but I (perhaps controversially) disagree. To my mind any Engineer (depending on definition) should have a basic knowledge and interest in the way things work, which can then be specialised into Electronics, Software, Design, Production, etc. Knowledge of every possible broken thing in the world is, of course, unreasonable, but the ability to *look* at something, and to understand it should not be past us. It’s not everyday that people come to me and ask “hey, my Nuclear reactor isn’t working, do you think you could take a look?” – pretty much every time it’s a simple electronic, mechanical, software problem or more usually just operator error.
Sure, sometimes it’s too specialist and there’s just no way. But you’d be surprised what you can do with existing knowledge, common sense and a willingness to try. You don’t have to be able to machine a part on a lathe or a mill. I can understand that it’s irritating, annoying and downright inconvenient, but the ability to analyse, design, create without instruction from someone else is one of the things that differentiates Engineers from Technicians.
Only last month the Secret Engineer wrote:
‘I have never understood the “I’ve never done that sort of stuff, its not my thing so I’m not even going to give it a go” mentality.’ And as mentioned in last month’s Secret Engineer article’s comments, you can always say no.
At least I can look at something broken, and then say no, this isn’t my field, you better get a software engineer, or construction engineer to fix it.
I just say ‘I didn’t go to college the day we studied washing machine repair’ (or whatever it is)
I absolutely agree.
The Assembly Drawing should contain only the functional requirements to be achieved by the assembly and these would normally be written by the Design Engineer.
Manufacturing information should not really be shown on the assembly drawing as these may contain proprietary or commercial information which the company might not wish to disclose to other companies for obvious reasons.
The manufacturing or assembly instructions should be written by the manufacturing engineer, with technical support / input if required by the Design Engineer.
If the Manufacturing Engineer is worth his salt the assembly instructions would have very few words with clear diagrams and photographs to explain the assembly procedures.
A clear scheme of examination is also required usually contained within the MI which is often a regulatory requirement LOLER, PUWER etc.
In my opinion Manufacturing Engineers have different skill sets to Design Engineers and again this relates to the simple term Engineer which is used and abused.
In previous careers I have often come across a partial converse of this situation, whereby a non-engineer or administrator assumes that an engineer ONLY knows about the core discipline and is incapable of appreciating or applying knowledge to other areas. It all falls back to a lack of appreciation of what an engineer is and can do as well described above. All engineers have common foundations, especially in maths and this maths can be applied universally to many problems. And it is not uncommon for an engineer to be able to tackle almost anything, with time and resources, but will invariably recognise when they are going beyond their capabilities and experience.
HR is particularly guilty of that. If they were looking for a truck mechanic, they’d plainly reject a lorry mechanic.
This article brings up some very valid points. But there is the other type of “engineer” who has a degree, perhaps even 2 or 3 degrees, who is hired for a job because of these pieces of paper, selected over and above others who have years of hands on practical experience, within the same company, but who do not possess the “Magical Ticket” – the degree. I am sure we all have seen at least one of these “engineers”. I know I have had to work with several of these types over my many years. Although they possess the education, they cannot transfer that knowledge into hands on actual work. They have a difficult time thinking in 2D and fail miserably thinking in 3D.This person cannot even operate a set of Allen wrenches without injuring themselves . They basically cannot fix anything mechanical. In my experience they cannot even communicate to others what needs to be done or how to proceed to accomplish a task. Yet time and time again, I see companies hire this type of engineering person over people in the company that have demonstrated their skills to perform beyond all expectations, but they do not get promoted to the engineering position because they lack the Magic Ticket. Personally, if I had to choose between hiring an unknown or a person in my company who has demonstrated countless times the ability to do everything a degreed engineer must do, I’ll take the person already in my company every time. If you can’t perform the mechanical duties; if you cannot communicate the processes to others, if you cannot think in 2D-3D and think outside the box; if all you have is the book smarts and a pretty piece of paper; that degree doesn’t mean much of anything. As my father used to say, you might as well take that piece of paper to the bathroom and put it to good use. Give me the man or woman who knows how to do the work. In my work place today, I would take 5 more people like my non-degreed people who are doing the engineering stuff every day, right here, right now!! Degrees are good, I’m not saying that they aren’t, but a person with a piece of paper and a title have to have the technical and mechanical know-how to go with it….otherwise all you have is a title and a pretty piece of paper, and they together won’t even get you a good cup of café.
Rex has made a very strong point about engineers who are hired because of the magic ticket, we have several. One recently contacted our parts manager asking for a spare part to be ordered because it had a broken bolt flush with the flange at the end of an folder steel strut from a conveyor. The strut was open on one face of the folded section, the bolt (M16) was broken flush on the outside face but clearly 50mm of it visible and accessible on the reverse side. A child could have removed that bolt or at least a first year apprentice. When I asked HR who the heck hired him I was told ‘Oh yes he was very good and if act over qualified, we were lucky to get him’ . Not one engineer or engineering manager (all of our managers are ‘ex tools’) was present at the selection process. When I quizzed the guy direct he really had no clue where to start and and had not even though of trying to get the bolt out.
Very frustrating and what is worse he is one a better salary than seasoned engineers of 15 / 20 years service.
I despair about the decision making process.
” companies hire this type of engineering person” …No its not companies who do so…its the *l**dy HR idiots who do!
Very true, often HR have a brief and they have to “interpret it” using what they see as an appropriate individual for a role, and often being lazy and lacking engineering knowledge means they focus on a piece of paper and several buzz words,
“….you are seen as this mystical being”
So why don’t the general and so-called professional populations treat we Engineers with the grace and favour and respect and value with which (geddit) ‘wizards’ were always revered in the past.
I speak of the religious and legal wizards who lauded it over all, for centuries? I do believe its ‘our’ turn now. just get the meja on side, and the population will follow?
Woah, hold on a second- I can understand the frustration… but there is something here that perhaps is being taken for granted. Yes, engineering is composed of many specialized careers and skill-sets, but having the mindset of an engineer gives an individual an analytical and creative advantage to approaching foreign problems. I’m not saying just any specialized engineer will be able to repair an infinite Rube Goldberg machine that doesn’t lose energy (*cough, cough* not that they exist *cough* so, not many could *cough* Ehem, excuse me). And I’m not saying that this isn’t a relevant or even reasonable expression to all those who hear the title ‘engineer’ and simply assume all their nuclear reactor and leaky faucet problems are solved and expect those hired individuals to perform tasks they are not actually proficient in (specifically). But for a moment, consider the flexibility of, well, any label (especially that of this profession) and consider that engineering CAN be a logical attribution when trying to find someone with great analytical skills. However, it could be more appropriate to designate these individuals as Makers in some informal version of an engineer that encourages a ‘Jack of all trades’ disposition. Perhaps I’m a tad radical in my ways, but I kinda believe their to be to strict a code of formality for categories of profession. And, many innovation have shown us that when diversifying ourselves within our field and, thus, developing our specialization- we can achieve some great solutions and technological creations. I don’t disagree, but I’m pointing reference to a bit of somewhat related ambiguity that might be of light here.
Mike. I think it is more the HR idiots do the sorting for interview, that ensures the right person does not get a chance of the job!
You got it in one!
Yes, HR does the initial job search, 1st interview, etc., etc. but the department manager(s) have a huge say in the hiring process, after all, it is their department. But even they will pass over individuals who are more than qualified, and are doing the jobs they are trying to hire someone to do. Instead of standing up to HR and saying No…John or Jane Doe here has been fulfilling the duties of this job posting and I want them hired, it matters not whether they have a degree or not, they have proved they are capable. The managers cave into the HR pressure. And when the smoke clears, the lowly person who was doing the work without a degree, is left to “teach” the recent hire how to do the job, that as a non-degree person, was not qualified to do. And many times, the degreed person doesn’t live up to the expectations and is fired or quits, and the lowly non-degreed person goes back to assuming those same duties he or she is not qualified to do all because they don’t have a piece of pretty paper.
Engineers, and those who fulfill the duties of a degreed engineer, are many times just treated as a non skilled individual and are generally under appreciated, under paid, and as many have stated here, are expected to save the bloody universe from unseen aliens and creatures, and in their spare time, put Mr. Humpty Dumpty back together again when all of these things fall outside their sphere of training and expertise.
A person that studied engineering, but that keeps saying: “
Simply can’t BE a good engineer, period! (sorry). -Unless he/she changes radically.-
Simple Rules of Thumb:
A TRUE engineer ALWAYS takes a GOOD look at any problem, frequently understanding where the trouble might be in a short time, mostly before any other person in the room… while a DESK engineer will immediately say: “Well, I’m afraid that’s not my area of expertise…”
A True engineer will always find the sense, the nature and the magnitude of a problem and the associated phenomena, thanks to his/her powerful command of the many physical analogies, so he/she will take a firm grasp of the problem, rationalizing all the pertinent information in an orderly and firmly manner, regardless of it being of electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, thermal, acoustic or any other field nature’s… while a Desk engineer will immediately find which specialties MIGHT be related and promptly says: “we’ll need to get a (whatever) specialist, you know…”
A True Engineer is able to repair most of his/her appliances, car, home devices etc., while a desk engineer will usually say: “It could be that the gizmo has not been energized enough…” or “it most probably needs resetting” or anything that sounds as vague as anything an ignorant lawyer would say while trying not to appear as clueless as he/she is.
A True Engineer has a high appreciation for a good design, always priorizing reliability, durability and performance over such vague terms as “Coolness”, “Cachét” or snob values, while a desk engineer only repeats whatever others said about a design or what he/she saw at a webpage or magazine…
A True Engineer LOVES tools, cares them and is capable of buying just the right tool regardless of brandnames or prestige arguments, AND KNOWS HOW TO ACTUALLY USE THEM!, while a desk engineer only has a vague idea of what purpose SOME tools might be for.
A true Engineer has a deep respect for field technicians and artesans, and is able to explain in their own terms and language exactly how he/she wants that special part to be made, and WHY he does. The Desk Engineer instead, feels his/her credentials automatically puts him/her “above” any non-degreed personel, and frequently even ignores the proper machining terminology necessary to make the part.
A True engineer always knows the proper way to jump-star a car, while a Desk Engineer worries he/she might be electrocuted by the car’s battery!
A True Engineer don’t gives a $#%t about credentials, titles, degrees or anything related, He/She only needs to know if the other person has or lacks the necessary KNOWLEDGE, period!
A True Engineer will always love all technical stuff, and is capable of finding the sheer beauty of a well designed or well made piece of machinery, regardless of its appearance or if it is covered in grease or dirt, as his/her eyes will see through all the grime and grease and penetrate to the substance of that design, most probably the result of the hard work of another True Engineer.
A True Engineer is always reading, studying, learning. He/She keeps his/her “edge” and is not afraid to ask for help in order to learn modern and too-different concepts, as long as people help them, they will always find a way to correlate his/her previous knowledge with new concepts, and maybe will find some analogies that could explain “new” concepts in a more clear and simple way.
A True Engineer NEVER EVER retires entirely, as He/She will keep active, and trying hard to repair, fix or simply define with precision what went wrong, as far as he/she still can see/hear or touch/feel how a damn thing is not working properly. Amclaussen, 38+ years as Engineer.
I appreciate and acknowledge your response – and disagree with the majority of it. I feel the definition of an engineer is broader than you have constrained it to be – and believe myself to be a True Engineer – albeit not your ideal.
I loved making stuff when I was at college – but preferred to sit behind a desk to use my imagination and mathematical skills to design something for someone else to make. This easily translated into a Design Engineer role (plus having the additional required skills to make the computer do exactly what I wanted) when I could be the perfectionist that I am with a CAD model.
With my second car, they became so complex that faults were more likely to be replaceable modules that the garage could fit far quicker than I could – and I did not have the space for a garage full of equipment even if I was so inclined. Same goes for the other “maker” stuff – I found I preferred Lego. And I would rather pay other people to fix things properly, and spend my own time on the multitude of other pursuits I also enjoy – travel, theatre, castles etc. After all, being an engineer surely does not mean that has to be the ONLY thing I enjoy doing?
I believe my colleagues know my knowledge level makes me a competent engineer at my company, and I’m sorry, but that’s enough for me to call myself a True Engineer – one who does not feel the need to tinker. There is more than enough scope in the job type to cover both myself and my father (a consummate DIYer and retired electrical distribution engineer who still remembers everything back to first principles) and my mother (who was once asked back as a design engineer after retiring to raise the family to her ducting firm, because they landed an extra-large project, but applies her tinkering skills to multiple crafts).
Programmers always have this e.g. “can you just take a look at my phone”? er…I write software. Plus nobody respects you for fixing something difficult – they are only impressed if it’s so trivial that it takes you a second. So I don’t fix people’s computers or phones anymore. They can go to a shop and pay and be ungrateful to someone else.
I did my apprenticship as an Aircraft Toolmaker, I went to University and got a degree in engineering and had my own company supplying air compressors, welding equipment, power tools and all ancillary equipment that goes with that lot. I have been asked to “Fix” all kinds of plant from diesel engines to refrigeration plants, and in the majority of instances I have been able to do just that. I would class myself as an “Engineer”, capital “E”. After 45 years as an Engineer I am now finding that they won’t let me retire. I am an extremely practical person and can fix most things as a lot of local companies have found out. As a 70 year old I would like to sit back and take it easy but, and here is the main problem, there doesn’t seem to be anybody comming up who will take our place. There has been a very sad lack of young men / women who have served their time in the school of hard knocks who can take our place’s. This is partly the fault of government who haven’t given any help to companies to replace the Craft Engineers who are now retireing, and the companies themselves who haven’t had the forsight to have a good apprenticeship scheme to train the people they will need as the old ones retire. I take great pride in calling myself an Engineer and my good lady keeps asking “When are you going to stop work”, I love my work and as a self employed Engineer my reply is “I will stop work when I stop rideing my motorcyles, about half an hour before they bury me”. My clients keep asking me to do this, fix that, and advise them on how to do the other. As long as I can, I will, but what will happen when I and the likes of me are gone, I can’t answer, that’s a question for you.
I love this attitude, it really sums up to me what *being* an Engineer is rather than being *qualified* as an Engineer. I don’t think it’s as easy as is made out, if you work for a company this sort of “behaviour” isn’t encouraged (more the Desk Engineer as described by Alfredo Claussen) – in this instance you run your own company so can do what you like.
But these young people (future Engineers) do exist (and I almost class myself as still young), and what I aim to do is to try and instill this sense of enthusiasm and can-do at STEM events or career evenings and where I can. I may have only inspired a few, but I hope it’s made a difference.
This is a good discussion, keep it up!
Sincere congratulations and my full respect for you Graham Taylor. I feel very much like you (today May 24, I am becoming 63 years old), and reading that you still feel like a strong Engineer at 70 really inspires me to keep hard working as an active Engineer. I am also worried what kind of young engineers will follow us… As far as I can see, it appears that all around the world many examples of mediocre to really-bad engineering can be seen! Perhaps a way to leave something beneficial to the ones following us, would be to try to teach our hard earned knowledge to new generations. BUT, how would we do it when younger people behave as ‘know-all’ idiots? Maybe someones are right when they point out that a certain lack of respect for true Engineers is common. Never mind, we have to keep working hard as you rightly said. Very Best Regards, Graham! Amclaussen.
I’m a ‘Heavy Automotive Engineer’ according to what is written on my Trade Certificate, a Diesel Mechanic to most and like Graham have noticed the changes in society worldwide. Now I cannot even apply for a job as a tool salesman because quote,”you don’t have a degree”.
What none of the university educated idiots now running most companies don’t realise is that nothing beats hands on tutelage combined with intense study which is what an apprenticeship is.
N.Z. did away with formal apprenticeships in the mid-eighties and now businesses are collapsing because there are no tradesmen and nobody moving up through the ranks into management with real world knowledge.
A belated attempt to remedy the situation is failing because this is global and importing third world standard workers from the third world actually makes the situation worse.
What the academics will do in 20 years is a mystery.
OK – credentials on the table. I am 62. I have a degree in Physics. I’m a chartered mechanical engineer. I can weld, turn, mill, design circuits, do pipefitting, write PLC code, wire up a plug, fix things, etc. I don’t state these things to boast in any way – just so you can see where I am coming from, i.e. I have more than a foot in both camps here. My concern is that I can’t see where the next generation of experienced engineers is going to come from. In the modern age, young engineers very quickly become “desk engineers” with their eyes glued to their screens. They (and their employers) think that engineering is about emails and managing suppliers. They will get no experience of “real engineering” because they never get away from their computers to go out and touch it. Hence they make decisions about stuff that they don’t have the experience to understand. There are lots of issues here, going right back to how science is taught in schools. It is now imperative to deliver “efficient” exam results rather than encourage curiosity and scientific method and understanding. This is what I call the “driving school” model of education. i.e. a “good” driving school is one which delivers the most passes with the fewest lessons by teaching only what is needed to pass the test. Is this really how we want to educate the engineers and scientists of the future?
I did a craft maintenance apprenticeship in the 70’s, I became a maintenance Engineer, a Manufacturing manager, a Quality Manager (because I wanted to sort the crap out of what we made) and a GM and Director and all within one firm.
I can fix those doover-whatnots (doo-hickey indeed!)
Not enough seasoned professionals about folks, and it worries me.
But, I do know how to find a good person and I interview for them. The secret is; Don’t let HR near them once they’re in the building!
It takes an Engineer to recognise an Engineer
I think the fundamental problem is one of a lack of understanding, and that the term Engineer is misunderstood and abused, older Engineers will have hands on experience and experience across multiple sectors based on hands on experience to give them transferable skills across many disciplines. Until people begin to understand that engineering has many disciplines and sectors, and that many can have transferable skills across sectors, and some are poles apart, we will get nowhere.
I come from a long line of Scottish engineers and inventors. Looking back over the generations , four
that I am acquainted with, all would attempt any challenge out of a helpful attitude to friend or stranger in need, some with degrees and some not, some with dozens of US and foreign patents and some not but all with a helpful attitude and curiosity, accepting any challenge, though qualifying that while they would try, they might not have the best expertise or right tools.
Specifically, I am reminded of my grandfather, during the US depression who stopped to help
a family immigrating into California who had broken down with a non functional rotor, which he identified and fashioned a makeshift replacement. Running rough but moving forward,
that family was enabled to make it to Los Angeles.
Any real engineer, a truly humane engineer, does his best to help. Because he is supposed to be a professional.